'BBC Arabic Service anti-western'

[Aptrgangr]

'BBC Arabic Service anti-western'

By Tom Leonard in New York

The BBC's Arabic language service operates a separate editorial system to the rest of the corporation that is "anti-Western and anti-democratic", an American academic said yesterday.
Frank Stewart, a Jerusalem-based Middle East expert, said that the World Service's Arabic radio service - which is soon to be supplemented by a television version - has been consistently hostile to the US and British governments while treating Arab leaders with kid gloves.
Writing in the New York Times, Prof Stewart claimed that the 60-year-old Arabic service was "entirely different" to the "quality" broadcasts of the World Service's English-language programmes.
He cited various examples, including a 50-minute BBC Arabic Service programme about torture which, he said, discussed only one specific allegation from the head of an organisation representing Saudis imprisoned by the US at Guantanamo Bay.
Prof Stewart said that the station subjected the words and deeds of Western leaders, especially those of the US and Britain, to "minute analysis, generally on the assumption that behind them lies a hidden and disreputable agenda". When British police exposed an alleged plot to blow up planes over the Atlantic, a BBC Arabic presenter concentrated a discussion on the theory that the arrests had taken place because Tony Blair wanted to associate Muslims with terrorism, he said.
Meanwhile, "authoritarian regimes and armed militants of the Arab world" got "sympathetic treatment", said Prof Stewart, who is a professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a visiting scholar at New York University.
Saddam Hussein was a "great favourite" of the service and it reported as "straight news" his re-election to a seven-year term in 2002, said Prof Stewart.
President Assad of Syria was similarly indulged, he claimed. When a US state department representative referred to Syria as a dictatorship, his BBC interviewer "immediately interrupted and reprimanded him". Prof Stewart alleged that the Arabic Service not only shielded Arab leaders from criticism, but avoided topics - such as human rights, and corruption - that they might find embarrassing.
When the service did occasionally broach such sensitive topics, they were usually dealt with in general terms, with guarded references to "certain Arab countries".
Prof Stewart said it was "strange" that the British government, which funds the World Service through a Foreign Office grant, paid for such broadcasts.
The World Service is closing 10 foreign language services to pay for its Arabic television channel, expected to cost £19 million a year.
The BBC insisted that its Arabic Service operated to the same editorial guidelines as the rest of the corporation and that it "pulled no punches" in its efforts to "test arguments on all sides".

Source

Muslims love conspiracy theories, it is part of their culture, I am not too surprised BBC serves them what they desire. In my opinion BBC has a low quality in general since it is not objective, but it is good compared to German news.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by Aptrgangr

Muslims love conspiracy theories, it is part of their culture, I am not too surprised BBC serves them what they desire. In my opinion BBC has a low quality in general since it is not objective, but it is good compared to German news.

And why do you think Britian allows such anti-Western and supposedly anti-British news service to broadcast, under the official umbrella of the British state (because BBC is state-owned)?

Isn't it highly probabale that this is also part of the British policy and favours British (and American) interests in some way? Otherwise they wouldn't alllow it...

And besides: as far as the last year plot to blow airplanes over the Atlantic is concerned, all the suspects have been released and it is very likely that the plot as such never existed or was engineered by the provocators of the British secret services. But curiously, inspite of that, millions of passengers all over the world are still being annoyed by very tight and absurd security measures at airports, eg. you cannot bring shampoo into the airplane etc. I had recently such an experience and it was very unpleasant. Wasn't the whole "terrorist plot" just an excuse to enact more Orwellian control over our lives, those Muslims who participated in the plot, being just used as "useful idiots"?

Don't accuse me of inventing conspiracy theories, I just see every day bigger encroachments over our lives at hands of government and am just trying to fugure out why is that so...

[Aptrgangr]

Originally Posted by prometheus

And why do you think Britian allows such anti-Western and supposedly anti-British news service to broadcast, under the official umbrella of the British state (because BBC is state-owned)?

Isn't it highly probabale that this is also part of the British policy and favours British (and American) interests in some way? Otherwise they wouldn't alllow it...

I am well aware this serves the interiour interest of the British government and allies. There is even a name for this phenomenon, it is called "Dhimmization". The only thing I do not undertand is how the British government intends to survive after the Muslims have got the majority here since appeasement never worked.

Originally Posted by prometheus

And besides: as far as the last year plot to blow airplanes over the Atlantic is concerned, all the suspects have been released and it is very likely the plot as such never existed or was engineered by the provocators of the British secret services. But curiously, inspite of that, millions of passengers all over the world are still being annoyed by very tight and absurd security measures at airports, eg. you cannot bring shampoo into the airplane etc. I had recently such an experience and it was very unpleasant. Wasn't the whole "terrorist plot" just an excuse to enact more Orwellian control over our lives, those Muslims who participated in the plot, being just used as "useful idiots"?

Don't accuse me of inventing conspiracy theories, I just see every day bigger encroachments over our lives at hands of government and am just trying to fugure out why is that so...

I am well aware these "anti-terror" laws have nothing to do with fighting Islamic terror despite it is asserted they were. People are indoctrinated and believe these measures were made for their safety, it is really annoying alost noone sees the truth. The truth is these laws were introduced to keep the own population under control. The self-serving claim there was a war against terror is rubbish, if they really wanted they just needed to deport those who have links to terror organizations. But this is not done, those are even given protection. In FRG there is an agreement - FRG funds Muslim organizations and foil US "anti-terror" measures, in return they may do what they want except terrorist attacks in FRG.

[Marcus Marulus]

Yes, this whole security or safety thing is one of the most widespread myths and superstitions of the modern west. The fact is that there is no absolute safety in life, never was, never will be. This myth is used as an excuse to subdue people and keep them quiet.

[Franze]

Yes, in general, all the things about "war in terror" are falses, for example the war is with islam, not with terror, when we fight with cholera, we said war against water?
Respect this service, well BBC is a lot of rubbish, therefore I am not surprised of its arabic version.